Saturday, July 03, 2010

Reason, Honor and the Lack Thereof

So, what do you do about a case like this?


London, England (CNN) -- The father and brother of a Harry Potter actress will appear in court later this month in Manchester, England, on charges of threatening to kill the young star, prosecutors said Friday.

Abdul Azad, 54, and his son Ashraf, 28, are accused of attacking actress Afshan Azad earlier this month because of her relationship with a Hindu man, a spokesman for the Crown Prosecution Service said. The family is Muslim.

These men were attacking their family member and are threatening what is known as a honor killing and it happens rather a lot. A woman consorts with an infidel, or acts in an independent manner in any way, and she's marked for death by her own family. Phyllis Chesler explains:

The study's findings indicate that honor killings accelerated significantly in a 20-year period between 1989 and 2009.[6] This may mean that honor killings are genuinely escalating, perhaps as a function of jihadist extremism and Islamic fundamentalism, or that honor killings are being more accurately reported and prosecuted, especially in the West, but also in the East. The expansion of the Internet may account for wider reporting of these incidents.

The worldwide average age of victims for the entire population is twenty-three (Table 1). This is true for all geographical regions. Thus, wherever an honor killing is committed, it is primarily a crime against young people. Just over half of these victims were daughters and sisters; about a quarter were wives and girlfriends of the perpetrators. The remainder included mothers, aunts, nieces, cousins, uncles, or non-relatives.

Honor killings are a family collaboration. Worldwide, two-thirds of the victims were killed by their families of origin. (See Table 1). Murder by the family of origin was at its highest (72 percent) in the Muslim world and at its lowest in North America (49 percent); European families of origin were involved almost as often as those in the Muslim world, possibly because so many are first- or second-generation immigrants and, therefore, still tightly bound to their native cultures. Alternatively, this might be due to the Islamist radicalization of third or even fourth generations. Internationally, fathers played an active role in over one-third of the honor murders. Fathers were most involved in North America (52 percent) and least involved in the Muslim world; in Europe, fathers were involved in more than one-third of the murders.

This is a problem that we must address, at least in the West. But we need to understand what we are dealing with. Chesler spotlights a particular problem:

Many Western feminists and advocates for victims of domestic violence have confused Western domestic violence or domestic femicide (the two are different) with the honor killings of older-age victims. Representatives of Islamist pressure groups including Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Canadian Islamic Congress, various academics (e.g., Ajay Nair, Tom Keil), activists (e.g., Rana Husseini), and religious leaders (e.g., Abdulhai Patel of the Canadian Council of Imams) have insisted that honor killings either do not exist or have nothing to do with Islam; that they are cultural, tribal, pre-Islamic customs, and that, in any event, domestic violence exists everywhere.[7] Feminists who work with the victims of domestic violence have seen so much violence against women that they are uncomfortable singling out one group of perpetrators, especially an immigrant or Muslim group. However, Western domestic femicide differs significantly from honor killing.[8]

Former National Organization for Women (NOW) president Kim Gandy compared the battered and beheaded Aasiya Hassan[9] to the battered (but still living) pop star Rihanna and further questioned whether Hassan's murder was an honor killing:

Is a Muslim man in Buffalo more likely to kill his wife than a Catholic man in Buffalo? A Jewish man in Buffalo? I don't know the answer to that, but I know that there is plenty of violence to go around—and that the long and sordid history of oppressing women in the name of religion surely includes Islam, but is not limited to Islam.[10]

At the time of the Hassan beheading, a coalition of domestic violence workers sent an (unpublished) letter to the Erie County district attorney's office and to some media stating that this was not an honor killing, that honor killings had nothing to do with Islam, and that sensationalizing Muslim domestic violence was not only racist but also served to render invisible the much larger incidence of both domestic violence and domestic femicide. They have a point, but they also miss the point, namely, that apples are not oranges and that honor killings are not the same as Western domestic femicides.

I would argue that these advocates aren't confusing things so much as blurring distinctions that must be made. So what is the crucial distinction, then?

One might argue that the stated murder motive of being "too Westernized" may, in a sense, overlap substantively with the stated and unstated motives involved in Western domestic femicide. In both instances, the woman is expected to live with male violence and to remain silent about it. She is not supposed to leave—or to leave with the children or any other male "property." However, the need to keep a woman isolated, subordinate, fearful, and dependent through the use of violence does not reflect a Western cultural or religious value; rather, it reflects the individual, psychological pathology of the Western batterer-murderer. On the other hand, an honor killing reflects the culture's values aimed at regulating female behavior—values that the family, including the victim's family, is expected to enforce and uphold.

Emphasis mine. You can argue that violence against women has been a Western cultural or religious value in the past, but it isn't now and hasn't been for a very long time now. Further, you could posit a comparison between the gruesome murder of Aasiya Hassan and the gruesome murder of Nicole Brown Simpson, but one thing is clear: very few people in the West now believe the man who murdered Nicole Brown Simpson was acting in an honorable way.

We can talk all we want about the clash of cultures, but a culture that gives sanction to killing its young women is not one with which we can reason. As we think about freedom and liberty, we need to keep in mind that both are hard got. We will never be perfect, even in the West, but we need to stand for freedom. When we send uncertain messages, or make false equivalences, we don't gain the respect of those who hate freedom.

There's a lot more in the Chesler study worth considering -- read the whole thing.

3 comments:

said...

Can't people just learn the TRUTH of God's love as this video points out?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m6qC6FCiY0

Mr. D said...

Tor,

Thanks for stopping by. Interesting video. Not sure I agree with it, but we're all Voltaire 'round here.

my name is Amanda said...

It is the same as domestic violence, in that it's indicative of oppression of women that exists all over the world. A religious honor killing is just a different medium. Though it still deserves to be specifically linked to the religion that supports it (in the extreme), because the psychology (one would imagine - overall, most Muslim families are horrified by it as well) is supposedly different. I would more be more apt to liken this to FGM, which people in the world have worked hard to end, for several decades.

Although I am not getting, from this post, exactly what kind of action that is proposed by pinpointing honor killings as specifically Muslim.